Attitudes of veterinarians to the changes in provision of bovine tuberculosis testing in England

Abstract

The number of cattle herds in the UK newly infected with bovine tuberculosis (Mycobacterium bovis) has doubled every nine years since 1979. Controlling bovine tuberculosis (bTB) currently costs the British taxpayer an estimated £100 million each year and the disease has been named ‘the most pressing animal health problem in the UK’. Routine intradermal tuberculin testing of cattle for bTB has mostly been carried out by private veterinarians trained as official veterinarians; however in July 2014 the English government announced its intention to tender for the supply of taxpayer-funded tuberculin testing. England was divided into five geographical lots and the new delivery partners were to commence their services by May 2015. Such a significant change resulted in mixed reactions from the veterinary community. There were concerns about whether providing these services would remain viable for veterinarians and what the subsequent impact would be on disease control as well as the critical relationship between veterinarians and farmers. Measures to control disease are unlikely to be successful if they are not practical or if the people expected to implement them have not been involved in their development. Social science can be used to measure attitudes and provide information on the acceptability and cost-effectiveness of disease control measures, as well as be a tool for monitoring effectiveness and identifying areas for their improvement. This research aimed to measure the attitudes to the changes of veterinarians and farmers in England using a questionnaire sent to veterinarians. The responses to the questions were compared among various demographic groups. The results showed consistent differences between the experiences of veterinarians working as delivery partners compared to those working as subcontractors, with significant differences in 15 of the 17 questions, and between veterinarians who work in larger practices (>15 veterinarians) compared to those in smaller practices (≤15 veterinarians) with significant differences for 16 of the questions. Subcontractors and respondents from smaller practices indicated that the changes had a negative impact on them and their clients emotionally and negatively affected their and their clients’ attitudes towards the government. No positive or negative financial impact was reported. The delivery partners and respondents from larger practices showed a positive attitude towards the government and the financial impact of the changes for both them and their clients; they also indicated a positive impact on them and their clients emotionally. All four of these groups affirmed the importance of a trusting relationship between veterinarian and farmer. Five of the questions showed significant differences in responses between some of the age groups and five of the questions showed significant differences between the risk zones for bTB, although no clear pattern emerged. There were no significant differences in the responses according to gender; those in mixed compared to exclusively large animal practice; UK graduates compared to European graduates or those practising in the South West of England, where bTB is the most prevalent, compared to the rest of the country. The differences observed between the groups were noted particularly in how the changes affected veterinarians emotionally and financially as well as how veterinarians perceived the effects on farmers emotionally.